About me: I graduated college six years ago (a top women's school) with a 3.78, magna, distinctions on both theses, president of student club, you know the drill. I've been a paralegal for four out of these six years at a small complex commercial litigation firm and love my attorneys and the work we do. For the past two years I've volunteered for a prisoners' rights group. Both my job and volunteering commitment have strongly urged me to attend law school. Re finances, my mom's a poor single mother who will finally get to retire in five years from her ridiculously underpaid job. My sister will be going to college in the fall. I have no Mr. Moneybags to pay my law school loans, and some of my income actually goes to support my mom and sister. I paid for college myself through scholarships and loans and just finished paying them off in total last December.

I studied hard, took the LSAT in December 2010, and got a 164--I had been practice testing around 169. I applied to only the top tier schools and was rejected from all of them. So I took all the TLS advice and worked my ass off to retake the LSAT. The month leading up to the test I consistently scored 172-178 at home. On test day of October 2011, I got... a 164. Decided to lower my standards and apply to some T20-30 and strong regional schools, since I didn't see the point in doing the LSAT thing for a third time when I really gave it my all the last time.

Eventually got full scholarships from Cardozo (which I turned down because the recent alums I spoke to in PI said it was just not a good place to be for PI), Temple (decided it wasn't worth it to choose over Brooklyn when I'd have to move), and Brooklyn, and 25k/year from both BU and BC. (I am not as interested in BU, as the recent alums I spoke to said that they had no public interest commitment to speak of and were very Boston firm oriented.)

My goal: public interest non-profit or government. Failing that, midlaw or small law. Zero interest in BigLaw. I make low-mid 40s now and can live on it just fine, though more is always better. I live frugally and my law school goal isn't money, it's more interesting work that makes a difference. I've been in the work force full-time for six years but I've been working consistently since I was 16, so I'm pretty good at networking. My understanding is that public interest tends to be marginally less snobby law school-wise than BigLaw, but it's actually more competitive, so I'm not sure how that shakes out in terms of choices. I'm planning to clinic or extern and pro bono pretty much every semester that it's possible to make as many connections as I can.

Northwestern: No scholarship. Total debt: about $250k.

Brooklyn: $48k/year scholarship (basically full ride) plus $5k/year living stipend, stip is top 80% (doable--if you're in the bottom 20% you should probably just drop out anyway). I learned yesterday that I was awarded the Sparer Fellowship for Public Interest, which gives you $5000 for your first summer and a resume line. They only give out a handful before the school year starts and the program director said the committee was extremely impressed with me, so I must interview well.Pros: I get to stay in NYC and keep my partner and apartment, the Sparer Fellowship automatically distinguishes me (there were 13 1L fellows last year in a class of 390), and the only loans I'd need are for living expenses.Cons: Ranking, potential lack of job prospects. (These should need no further explanation.)

Boston College: $20k/year scholarship, no stips. Total debt: Probably $130+k, since $40k/year plus I'd need to move, buy a car, etc. I have sent three emails in the last three weeks trying to negotiate my scholarship and have gotten no response.Pros: Higher ranked, prestige, presumably better overall job prospects. I've spoken to at least half a dozen alumni who have put me in touch with various people in PI and they were all really happy to talk about their career paths and how BC got them there so their alumni network has been great.Cons: It's in Boston (I've been a New Yorker for ten years), and about an hour from the city center, which might make externing difficult. I don't know how useful the alumni connections are really going to be, and I am worried that it's too strongly regional for me to easily work outside of Boston (namely NYC, Philly, SF). Will all those connections I work so hard to make in Boston by externing and volunteering actually help me get a job outside of Boston? It's also a lot of money for a school that isn't even T14. I'd also have to uproot my boyfriend of 8 years and/or live apart for an undetermined amount of time, which adds an unquantifiable dread factor.Already withdrew

EDIT: Brooklyn has now offered me a full scholarship, plus $5k/year stipend. Northwestern has accepted me off the waitlist, and I have edited this post to reflect that.

So I'm torn. Do I take the money from BLS and cross my fingers for jobs? Are my public interest prospects going to be better in a strong NYC regional school than at a better ranked school? Are BC's helpful alumni worth anything? My bosses at the firm say forget the money, go to the BEST school you can get into (easy to say when you're the named partner and your own kids went to Harvard and Penn Law). Most professionals I speak to tend to agree. Obviously I'd go to NYU or Columbia in a heartbeat, but... BC? I did really well in college and expect to do well in law school (doesn't everyone?), but I'm a practical person and know that nothing is certain so I am NOT betting my life on being top of the class.

Any and all advice is appreciated.

Last edited by zor on Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:28 pm, edited 5 times in total.

I thought I nipped this in the bud in my post, but calls to retake are not helpful. I am six years out of college and only getting older, and I already Did The Right Thing and took an extra year off to study and retake. The LSAT is obviously my albatross and I don't see the point of wasting another year and a whole lot of time on it, again. I am an excellent student but a lousy testtaker--my SATs were similarly underwhelming.

zor wrote:I thought I nipped this in the bud in my post, but calls to retake are not helpful. I am six years out of college and only getting older, and I already Did The Right Thing and took an extra year off to study and retake. The LSAT is obviously my albatross and I don't see the point of wasting another year and a whole lot of time on it, again. I am an excellent student but a lousy testtaker--my SATs were similarly underwhelming.

People are going to recommend you do it anyway because the payoff is huge. Of course the emotional toll and the time value of it are understandable drawbacks. You can take the advice or leave, it but if you ask me that's the optimal thing to do here, rationally speaking. Whether it's worth it to you is personal.

Otherwise, I think Brooklyn is a much lower-risk move than BC across the board.

zor wrote:I thought I nipped this in the bud in my post, but calls to retake are not helpful. I am six years out of college and only getting older, and I already Did The Right Thing and took an extra year off to study and retake. The LSAT is obviously my albatross and I don't see the point of wasting another year and a whole lot of time on it, again. I am an excellent student but a lousy testtaker--my SATs were similarly underwhelming.

Considering your PT average and your GPA another retake is clearly the best response, since a score in the 170s would send you into the T14 (potentially even with $ if you scored high enough) and give you larger scholarships at schools such as BC. As it stands now, I'd say Brooklyn. The debt avoidance is more important than better job chances in your situation.

zor wrote:About me: I graduated college six years ago (a top women's school) with a 3.78, magna, distinctions on both theses, president of student club, you know the drill. I've been a paralegal for four out of these six years at a small complex commercial litigation firm and love my attorneys and the work we do. For the past two years I've volunteered for a prisoners' rights group. Both my job and volunteering commitment have strongly urged me to attend law school. Re finances, my mom's a poor single mother who will finally get to retire in five years from her ridiculously underpaid job. My sister will be going to college in the fall. I have no Mr. Moneybags to pay my law school loans, and some of my income actually goes to support my mom and sister. I paid for college myself through scholarships and loans and just finished paying them off in total last December.

I studied hard, took the LSAT in December 2010, and got a 164--I had been practice testing around 169. I applied to only the top tier schools and was rejected from all of them. So I took all the TLS advice and worked my ass off to retake the LSAT. The month leading up to the test I consistently scored 172-178 at home. On test day of October 2011, I got... a 164. Decided to lower my standards and apply to some T20-30 and strong regional schools, since I didn't see the point in doing the LSAT thing for a third time when I really gave it my all the last time.

Eventually got full scholarships from Cardozo (which I turned down because the recent alums I spoke to in PI said it was just not a good place to be for PI), Temple (decided it wasn't worth it to choose over Brooklyn when I'd have to move), and Brooklyn, and 20k/year from both BU and BC. (I am not as interested in BU, as the recent alums I spoke to said that they had no public interest commitment to speak of and were very Boston firm oriented.) I'm also waitlisted at Northwestern, which if I got into, I'm not sure what I'd do since their COA is a staggering $79k/year.

My goal: public interest non-profit or government. Failing that, midlaw or small law. Zero interest in BigLaw. I make low-mid 40s now and can live on it just fine, though more is always better. I live frugally and my law school goal isn't money, it's more interesting work that makes a difference. I've been in the work force full-time for six years but I've been working consistently since I was 16, so I'm pretty good at networking. My understanding is that public interest tends to be marginally less snobby law school-wise than BigLaw, but it's actually more competitive, so I'm not sure how that shakes out in terms of choices. I'm planning to clinic or extern and pro bono pretty much every semester that it's possible to make as many connections as I can.

The situation: Ultimately it's down to two schools, Boston College or Brooklyn Law School.

Boston College: $20k/year scholarship, no stips. Total debt: Probably $130+k, since $40k/year plus I'd need to move, buy a car, etc. I have sent three emails in the last three weeks trying to negotiate my scholarship and have gotten no response.Pros: Higher ranked, prestige, presumably better overall job prospects. I've spoken to at least half a dozen alumni who have put me in touch with various people in PI and they were all really happy to talk about their career paths and how BC got them there so their alumni network has been great.Cons: It's in Boston (I've been a New Yorker for ten years), and about an hour from the city center, which might make externing difficult. I don't know how useful the alumni connections are really going to be, and I am worried that it's too strongly regional for me to easily work outside of Boston (namely NYC, Philly, SF). Will all those connections I work so hard to make in Boston by externing and volunteering actually help me get a job outside of Boston? It's also a lot of money for a school that isn't even T14. I'd also have to uproot my boyfriend of 8 years and/or live apart for an undetermined amount of time, which adds an unquantifiable dread factor.

Brooklyn: $48k/year scholarship (basically full ride), stip is top 80% (doable--if you're in the bottom 20% you should probably just drop out anyway). I learned yesterday that I was awarded the Sparer Fellowship for Public Interest, which gives you $5000 for your first summer and a resume line. They only give out a handful before the school year starts and the program director said the committee was extremely impressed with me, so I must interview well.Pros: I get to stay in NYC and keep my partner and apartment, the Sparer Fellowship automatically distinguishes me (there were 13 1L fellows last year in a class of 390), and the only loans I'd need are for living expenses.Cons: Ranking, potential lack of job prospects. (These should need no further explanation.)

So I'm torn. Do I take the money from BLS and cross my fingers for jobs? Are my prospects going to be better in a strong NYC regional school than at a better ranked Boston regional school? Are BC's helpful alumni worth anything? My bosses at the firm say forget the money, go to the BEST school you can get into (easy to say when you're the named partner and your own kids went to Harvard and Penn Law). Most professionals I speak to tend to agree. Obviously I'd go to NYU or Columbia in a heartbeat, but... BC? I did really well in college and expect to do well in law school (doesn't everyone?), but I'm a practical person and know that nothing is certain so I am NOT betting my life on being top of the class.

Any and all advice is appreciated.

I would say BC over Brooklyn. To be honest most of the problems you have from BC would be remedied if you went to BU (i.e. closeness to the city, externing will be easier---and is a popular option there, places better in NYC, etc.). A lot of our alum gets placed in Public Interest, and we even have PIP grants over the summer so people can get paid for P.I. work. But, that probably is not on the table, I will reiterate BC because it gives you AT LEAST more flexibility, Brooklyn you will ONLY be able to work in NY. BC you will at least be able to work in NY, New England and the Mid Atlantic. The drawback is---it will be significantly more difficult to do well at BC over Brooklyn. Depends on your risk aversion as well.

zor wrote:I thought I nipped this in the bud in my post, but calls to retake are not helpful. I am six years out of college and only getting older, and I already Did The Right Thing and took an extra year off to study and retake. The LSAT is obviously my albatross and I don't see the point of wasting another year and a whole lot of time on it, again. I am an excellent student but a lousy testtaker--my SATs were similarly underwhelming.

I'm 9 years out of college. I've been in a similar situation (worried about getting older, wasting time, took the test thrice), now I'm starting at a T6 in the fall. Suck it up and retake. Don't fuck yourself over because you feel like you are getting old.

How are you going to feel when you waste 3 years at law school and come out to find you can't get a job?

Edit: BC is a good school, and you have a decent amount of money. But you could potentially end up with an even better school, and/or a lot more money, and better loan repayment plans. It seems like a shame not to go for it.

Last edited by Tadatsune on Thu Apr 26, 2012 10:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

Bgibbs wrote:Considering your PT average and your GPA another retake is clearly the best response, since a score in the 170s would send you into the T14 (potentially even with $ if you scored high enough) and give you larger scholarships at schools such as BC. As it stands now, I'd say Brooklyn. The debt avoidance is more important than better job chances in your situation.

I am well aware of this, and trust me when I say it tears me up that I tried so hard and failed so miserably on the actual exam (twice) when it means such a huge difference in my future. But that emotional capital is spent and I am not doing it again, and I can either spend my whole life trying to get better at a meaningless test or actually working towards something.

elm84dr wrote:I would say BC over Brooklyn. To be honest most of the problems you have from BC would be remedied if you went to BU (i.e. closeness to the city, externing will be easier---and is a popular option there, places better in NYC, etc.). A lot of our alum gets placed in Public Interest, and we even have PIP grants over the summer so people can get paid for P.I. work. But, that probably is not on the table, I will reiterate BC because it gives you AT LEAST more flexibility, Brooklyn you will ONLY be able to work in NY. BC you will at least be able to work in NY, New England and the Mid Atlantic. The drawback is---it will be significantly more difficult to do well at BC over Brooklyn. Depends on your risk aversion as well.

BU had terrible PI placement. The PIP president isn't even going into PI, and a BU recent alum I spoke to who's a public defender said they had no institutional support and she had to find her job on her own. That scared me away from BU.

My risk aversion is really high just because I don't have a financial safety net if BC blows up in my face. $50k from Brooklyn I can pay back in pretty much any job; $130k from BC, not so much. I am attracted to the geographic flexibility of BC, but I have been warned that BC is a lot more regional than people think, and I am concerned about being stuck in Boston.

zor wrote:I thought I nipped this in the bud in my post, but calls to retake are not helpful. I am six years out of college and only getting older, and I already Did The Right Thing and took an extra year off to study and retake. The LSAT is obviously my albatross and I don't see the point of wasting another year and a whole lot of time on it, again. I am an excellent student but a lousy testtaker--my SATs were similarly underwhelming.

I'm 9 years out of college. I've been in a similar situation, now I'm starting at a T6 in the fall. Suck it up and retake. Don't fuck yourself over because you feel like you are getting old.

How are you going to feel when you waste 3 years at law school and come out to find you can't get a job?

If I thought taking more time would actually result in a higher score, I would do it. But I didn't improve at all the second time and I don't see myself scoring better.

Bgibbs wrote:Considering your PT average and your GPA another retake is clearly the best response, since a score in the 170s would send you into the T14 (potentially even with $ if you scored high enough) and give you larger scholarships at schools such as BC. As it stands now, I'd say Brooklyn. The debt avoidance is more important than better job chances in your situation.

I am well aware of this, and trust me when I say it tears me up that I tried so hard and failed so miserably on the actual exam (twice) when it means such a huge difference in my future. But that emotional capital is spent and I am not doing it again, and I can either spend my whole life trying to get better at a meaningless test or actually working towards something.

elm84dr wrote:I would say BC over Brooklyn. To be honest most of the problems you have from BC would be remedied if you went to BU (i.e. closeness to the city, externing will be easier---and is a popular option there, places better in NYC, etc.). A lot of our alum gets placed in Public Interest, and we even have PIP grants over the summer so people can get paid for P.I. work. But, that probably is not on the table, I will reiterate BC because it gives you AT LEAST more flexibility, Brooklyn you will ONLY be able to work in NY. BC you will at least be able to work in NY, New England and the Mid Atlantic. The drawback is---it will be significantly more difficult to do well at BC over Brooklyn. Depends on your risk aversion as well.

BU had terrible PI placement. The PIP president isn't even going into PI, and a BU recent alum I spoke to who's a public defender said they had no institutional support and she had to find her job on her own. That scared me away from BU.

My risk aversion is really high just because I don't have a financial safety net if BC blows up in my face. $50k from Brooklyn I can pay back in pretty much any job; $130k from BC, not so much. I am attracted to the geographic flexibility of BC, but I have been warned that BC is a lot more regional than people think, and I am concerned about being stuck in Boston.

zor wrote:I thought I nipped this in the bud in my post, but calls to retake are not helpful. I am six years out of college and only getting older, and I already Did The Right Thing and took an extra year off to study and retake. The LSAT is obviously my albatross and I don't see the point of wasting another year and a whole lot of time on it, again. I am an excellent student but a lousy testtaker--my SATs were similarly underwhelming.

I'm 9 years out of college. I've been in a similar situation, now I'm starting at a T6 in the fall. Suck it up and retake. Don't fuck yourself over because you feel like you are getting old.

How are you going to feel when you waste 3 years at law school and come out to find you can't get a job?

If I thought taking more time would actually result in a higher score, I would do it. But I didn't improve at all the second time and I don't see myself scoring better.

I'm not going to keep harping on this, because you obviously don't want me too, but the last thing I'll say is this:

You are practice testing much higher, which means you have the potential to do much better. My performance the first 2 times was disappointing, much as yours was. But I took it again because I knew I had the potential to do much better. If it doesn't work out, then it doesn't, and you will have indeed lost a year. But the chances are good you could come out in a significantly better position - its not a mechanical thing ("I gave it my all last time."); just because you study more doesn't mean you automatically do better. The LSAT is, in my opinion, a very fickle test, and I was not always consistent (ie, it most tests were good, but every once and a while you got a "bad" test which you didn't handle well for whatever reason.) If you can get your nerves under control, you should be in good shape. You've taken the real deal twice now, so you are used to the testing environment and there should be no surprises. If you can keep your head, your chances of scoring 170+ should be very good.

Ultimately the decision is yours, but if you want to do this law thing, I think you owe it to yourself to put yourself in the best position possible going in.

P.S. What happened the second time, might I ask? And what makes you think it will hold you back again?

Tadatsune wrote:I'm not going to keep harping on this, because you obviously don't want me too, but the last thing I'll say is this:

You are practice testing much higher, which means you have the potential to do much better. My performance the first 2 times was disappointing, much as yours was. But I took it again because I knew I had the potential to do much better. If it doesn't work out, then it doesn't, and you will have indeed lost a year. But the chances are good you could come out in a significantly better position - its not a mechanical thing ("I gave it my all last time."); just because you study more doesn't mean you automatically do better. The LSAT is, in my opinion, a very fickle test, and I was not always consistent (ie, it most tests were good, but every once and a while you got a "bad" test which you didn't handle well for whatever reason.) If you can get your nerves under control, you should be in good shape. You've taken the real deal twice now, so you are used to the testing environment and there should be no surprises. If you can keep your head, your chances of scoring 170+ should be very good.

Ultimately the decision is yours, but if you want to do this law thing, I think you owe it to yourself to put yourself in the best position possible going in.

P.S. What happened the second time, might I ask? And what makes you think it will hold you back again?

I really have no idea. I prepped for a few months but put my nose to the grindstone at the end. The six weeks leading up to the test I came home from my full-time job every day and took a full-length practice test. It was grueling and awful but by the last few weeks I was consistently scoring 170+. I went into the test feeling VERY confident. None of the nerves I had the first time. I knew screwed up a bit of the games stuff but I didn't think it was too much (and it wound up not being), and actually walked out there pretty sure I had nailed at least 168. I was shocked at my score. When I compared what I got wrong, it wasn't any one weak spot--just a smattering of incorrect answers across the board, many of which seemed particularly arbitrary to me.

I went in there with a great track record and feeling very good, and yet it didn't translate to a high score. As I said, this isn't new to me. I had the same experience on the SATs.

Trust me when I say I understand why everyone says retake--it's exactly that reason that I did retake. But prepping for that test was grueling, and I felt I did everything right with no payoff two years in a row, so I don't see what would be different this time that would be worth the loss of that year. I did everything right, everything felt good, it seemed great. I also, honestly, don't have the money to apply again. I know that sounds pathetic but I laid out application fees two years in a row and with my deposit money put down I'm broke.

So anyway, that's it, and I want to end this line of comments on the LSAT.

Do not retake. The combination of numbers and hopes can often cloud judgement. Personal considerations are a large factor. Some people just can't do better at some point with these tests. The failure of some people to understand this on these boards just flies in the face of realistic understanding.

However, if you felt like you were doing better taking these PTs and felt like you just needed more time and you could get a better score that's another story. That doesn't sound like its the case with you though, and I wouldn't spend anymore serious thought on retaking.

I don't think I am qualified to pick between the two schools you proposed. I will offer some thoughts mainly on BC though. People intern/extern in downtown Boston. It's about 45mins from the law campus. People do it, and you can have all the possibilities of externing downtown if you want to. BC also offers good connections to cities outside of Boston. (Though obviously its much easier to get a job in Boston with BC). There seems to be a number of personal elements that you have to seriously think about.

Sandstorm wrote:Do not retake. The combination of numbers and hopes can often cloud judgement. Personal considerations are a large factor. Some people just can't do better at some point with these tests. The failure of some people to understand this on these boards just flies in the face of realistic understanding.

However, if you felt like you were doing better taking these PTs and felt like you just needed more time and you could get a better score that's another story. That doesn't sound like its the case with you though, and I wouldn't spend anymore serious thought on retaking.

I don't think I am qualified to pick between the two schools you proposed. I will offer some thoughts mainly on BC though. People intern/extern in downtown Boston. It's about 45mins from the law campus. People do it, and you can have all the possibilities of externing downtown if you want to. BC also offers good connections to cities outside of Boston. (Though obviously its much easier to get a job in Boston with BC). There seems to be a number of personal elements that you have to seriously think about.

Thanks. I know I can make it work at BC and I really love the school and I'm crossing my heart of hearts that will offer me some more scholarship money once they see I've double-deposited. I see you got into BU and BC--where will you be going in the fall?

BU didn't offer me anything and BC did. I had an interesting experience with financial services. With my numbers I thought I probably should have gotten something as far as a scholarship. It wasn't until I called several times, and spoke with some people higher up until they 'told me' about my half a ride scholarship. They claimed it was a mistake and I was supposed to get that scholarship all along. However, I'm not fully sure it didn't have something to do with calling and telling them I was planning on going to GW instead. My advice, do a little more than just double-depositing. Call and tell them how much you want to go there and whatnot. (Its a game of blackjack, you want to get on their case just enough to where your not annoying them)

BU didn't offer me anything and BC did. I had an interesting experience with financial services. With my numbers I thought I probably should have gotten something as far as a scholarship. It wasn't until I called several times, and spoke with some people higher up until they 'told me' about my half a ride scholarship. They claimed it was a mistake and I was supposed to get that scholarship all along. However, I'm not fully sure it didn't have something to do with calling and telling them I was planning on going to GW instead. My advice, do a little more than just double-depositing. Call and tell them how much you want to go there and whatnot. (Its a game of blackjack, you want to get on their case just enough to where your not annoying them)

I assume this was merit aid, then? My aid is need-based, so I have no clue if that's seriously negotiable.

As it currently stands, I'd say Brooklyn. Your career goals don't justify the price at BC and you already have a lot of connections in NYYes, you'll need to hustle for a job, but at least you won't have soul-crushing debt when you get out

dingbat wrote:As it currently stands, I'd say Brooklyn. Your career goals don't justify the price at BC and you already have a lot of connections in NYYes, you'll need to hustle for a job, but at least you won't have soul-crushing debt when you get out